"I don't mean to be defecting or anythang" LOL I think somehow we'll survive without you. And PLEASE don't refer to anyone else as a pseudo-intellectual, the irony is painful.
What I find comical is that this man will sarcastically use Hitchens' own method in review of his book as a way to mock him, yet will undoubtedly NOT use that same method in review of the Bible. This type of irony is the same that Christians commonly use when bashing other religions ($cientology and its belief in aliens, for example) whilst simultaneously believing in talking snakes, Jewish zombies, and an invisible, celestial sky daddy.
As a mention, your note for Page 102 does not deserve to be struck out. That is, in fact, a true statement. The evidence is pretty clear, pick up and read a Bible. Specifically Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. I believe the foundation is set in Leviticus, and Deuteronomy gives specifics. To the point of even dictating what individuals you can traffic and why.
Alright, haven't read Hitchens' book, but a few corrections:
-Hitchens constantly calls himself "not an atheist, but an anti-theist". You fail.
-Look up atheism on Wikipedia, and its distinctions between "strong" and "weak".
-Where does Hitchens say he speaks for all atheists? All he ever said was that he speaks for those who share his annoyance at intrusive / dangerous religion, and the general nonsense.
And there I hoped for an actual rebuttal of his "challenge". Oh well.
Capn0 if you don’t care what people have to say quote at 6:17 then why jump down people’s throats and correct their spelling, look up dictionary definitions, degrade their comments and call them dumb-dumb? You even state “LMFAO I live for days like this” to user V45Rider which indicates you actually like people to leave unflattering comments so you can react to them. If you didn’t care you would hardly retaliate in an ad hominem attack as a form of defense.
@DawkinsForWeAreMany You're saying it's better to lie to yourself and say there's a god? LMAO
At least atheists are realistic, and don't kow tow to fairy tales! And BTW, all the church going maggots I've ever met are arrogant, unfriendly, stuck-up, self-centered garbage.Not surprising, when someone thinks they have a GOD on their side ☺
And why say "Less evolved"? You think god just snapped his fingers, no evolution needed.
Talk about being mixed up! Go back to proselytising little kids...
Is that really the book "God is not Great" It looks like you just printed out a cover and stuck it over a random book. I've never see one with a white bar on the top
Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris are "pseudo-intellectuals"??? Even the most fundemental **honest** religionist wouldn't make such an arrogant and dishonest statement!
I bet the real reason all those blacked out words were in your book was because you crossed out the ones you couldn't pronounce or define.
Keep fighting for air buddy. Information can be shared at the speed of light thanks to the internet. We are now able to discern truth, and it's killing religion. Thank your god that you will probably be long gone by the time it is put to rest, but believe me as our inteligence increases your god decreases.
@Capn0bvious It's hard to tell WHAT you're saying, with your dentures wobbling around in that anus you call a mouth! Had your face bashed in often enough, capt' tuffstuff?
And I see you have no problem being called a pederast... not surprising.Most trailerpark rednecks take it for granted! LMAO
How's the mop and bucket at McTubby's treating you? ☺
@Capn0bvious You are not the peer of Christopher Hitchens, not remotely close to being one. Your motives for posting this clip on youtube are as vacuous as they are transparent. Christopher Hitchens is in no way a "pseudo intellectual" as you assert he is. Christopher Hitchens is in fact a great intellectual as well as being a great man. You sir, are a moron attempting to execute what is a completely doomed attempt at self flattery. You have failed.
@Capn0bvious Who do you write for professionally again? And what talk or radio shows have you been a guest on? What books have you written again? Which university (not Oxford) did you go to again? Wait a minute, I dont know your name! Help me out here.
Most of these are opinions of Christopher's (as is pretty much the whole book, kinda the point) when taken in context. i wasn't aware his opinions were to be taken as 'atheist gospel' or transformed into a dogma? Or that opinions were to be all proven empirically?As many opinions dealing with say morality cannot be proven/disproven. you can only show the merits of one over another logically. Which I believe this book is an attempt at? Where's your point? Oh, you never had one?
@Capn0bvious You mentioned that certain people speak on behalf of atheism. First, I'd like to say that Hitchens is an anti-theist as well as an atheist. Second, and this is simply my opinion, these guys seem to simply be the most vocal proponents of atheism. I'm not getting a feeling of "they are establishing an atheist dogma" particularly.
That aside, we must always question and struggle and demand proof. Keep doing what you're doing! It'd be a shame for atheism to become dogmatic.
Atheist spokesperson? I have seen your videos and really doubt that you are an atheist. You speak like a Christian trying to persuade atheist whilst pretending to be an atheist. Saying that Hitchens is trying to make us think a certain way, completely goes against freethinking and obviously misses the point of the book.
CapnObvious: I think you need to start from the beginning of the book again and read a little slower this time. You say these passages don't have any evidence; well then you somehow managed to miss his arguements. Try again.
Then you say he is bashing religion. Mr. Hitchens is explaining why religion is bad... what did you expect? What would you suggest he write:"I am an atheist. The end."
I think he is talking about what is called Misotheism - a hatred for God. Some Atheism is Misotheism a hatred of God. He makes the point with Chris Htichens.
I think he is talking about what is called Misotheism - a hatred for God. Some Atheistm is Misotheism a hatred of God. This was a rather interesting video. I am a Christian.
For trolling i rate this video 5/10. It is like Boxxy only he is actually serious underneath the troll, attempting to undermine atheistic materials. As far as 'peer review', i think the OP is far from a peer of the author he'd like to discredit. I also think OP confuses anecdotal evidence with assertion. Overall i rate OP's IQ at 125 and like what he is doing, even though i am obviously patronising him. I also think OP probably 'transcribes' straight to film and thinks it is divinely inspired.
I hear what your saying and agree...just cause 1 finds the truth or what 1 would concider the truth,does not give them the right to bash on others,besides expressing or defending why one believes the way they do.It can be self distructing to think we have all the answers.But also it is hard not to push back against others who claim their right and your wrong,can't be out to attack others on what they believe,the same goes for everyone,believe what you want intill you have to defend your P O veiw
Lets take this in its full context. (starting on page 149) The author was drawing the parallel between baseless claims, past and current, between disasters the beliefs of the religious that attributed the cause of said disasters (i.e. Jerry Falwell's claim that America's acceptance of homosexuality was the cause of 9/11) hence the phrase used in the book "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." Great job-loser! Lear to read good loser
@Capn0bvious Wow. your ignorance is incredible. You just completely ignored his point to make some childish joke about him not writing every single word exactly right. Basic christian argument: ignore every point anyone made and than pick on then for a small irrelevant mistake.
When someone finishes up their "points" by calling me a loser (twice), I really don't feel obliged to answer anything they had to say in the first place. Would you?
@1danyol1 I'm not an native english speaker, true. But I'm willing to debate with you in finnish or in swedish, lets see how your grammar works for these languages. Oh and in future I'll try to learn to write better english.
Can you even read? Can you comprehend? Atheists don't make claims, theists do. Atheists refute them. Do some basic research before making a fool of yourself. Using fancy words like 'syntax' don't make you smart, they just show you read Tony Robbins. You sir, are the pseudo-intellectual....stop projecting. It's unbecoming.
Ya, your not really believable, clearly this is supposed to be a parody, ok we get it, your trying to go with logic, to discount Hitchenings arguments, yet you do not even state anything he says which you think are hypocritically, just claim they are, so if you want to not seem like a stupid ignorant hick.. Umm clearly state were he does this in his book, and explain it. Sheesh...
Off the top of my head, (46) - Iran. (176) - MLK's doctoral thesis was on the impossibility of the Resurrection. (125) - The Catholic church has been defining any reporter who exposes them as "biased." (254) - Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake. (250) - Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Sung-Il, etc. (5) - You've got to be kidding me if you think this isn't true, i.e., prison is filled with a disproportionate amount of Christians. (86) - Find me a dispute that hasn't. (102) - Obvious.
Chris Hitchens does not call himself an atheist. He is a self-proclaimed anti-theist. He is against theism as a dangerous and amoral proposition.
Sam Harris holds dogmatic faith of any stripe with the same contempt. Adherence to religious dogma is dangerous to mankind (inquisition, Islamic terrorism, mad gunmen...) You may stand neutral, but don't ask me to kowtow to such a tyranny of faith.
Let me break it down for you Dumbass... God = Bigfoot. Is that simple enough for you? There is no logical reason to believe in scary Native American tales of an 8 foot tall 700lb monster. It's great for keeping the kids in line, and some dense adults like yourself. But nothing more. There is no Bigfoot and there is no God... got it?
He calls Hitchens and Dawkins pseudo-intellectuals? Not to rip on the southern draw, but WFT? I've read "God is Not Great," "The God Delusion," and "The Greatest Show on Earth," and I found the syntax of both Hitchens and Dawkins to be both eloquent and precise. To be an atheist does not imply a hatred for religion. That being said, I can't see how some free-thinkers don't get irritated at or frustrated with the nonsensical beliefs and compartmentalization of the average religious person.
Christopher Hitchens' book is Christopher Hitchens' 'take'.. he never ASSERTS his 'opinions' as being fact... his thoughts on 'dismissing' things that are asserted with lack of evidence is pertaining to those things that people want to assert as being 'truth' you know.. factual... Christopher Hitchens didn't 'drama queen' his title, but you sure had a hay day with this video....
Also, I think Hitch expects (at least some of) his readers to do some investigating on their own. Reading one book doesn't cut it, I'm sure your little Alabama town has a whole library now...git 'er done.
Be well, Hitch. Our thoughts are with you. Cheers.
There are enough atheists out there who don't say a word to anyone about their atheism. Unless you're wearing blinders, we're in a battle with religion and we don't need people like you attacking our best writers/speakers. (BTW is that a crucifix you're wearing under your shirt?)
Great idea, Seabass. Now take that Sharpie to the bible (just as Thomas Jefferson did!) and you'll wind up with a pretty slim pamphlet to base a religion on.
You're telling Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins not to speak for you. But you find no problem saying "If you're going to call yourself atheist then you better stick within the parameters... atheism is a very passive, neutral, benign thing." You can say what you want, don't get pissed when they do the same thing. These people are making their case against religion. What's not to like about a well articulated personal perspective?
@MlSHKlN If you believe the Bible is true, but still find it detestable, you could be considered an antitheist. The video is retarded for much better reasons.
Dumb ass??is it?? dumas/dumbass?? whatever..atheist or not I don't give a fuck !!!....just shut the fuck up DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME or claim to speak for me !!! I can speak for myself!!!! I do not require any cocksucking nitwit speaking or claiming to speak for me . so shut the fuck up !!!!
I think you've absolutely overlooked the instances that would make provisions of evidence a requirement, none of which are contained in this book. Having read the wealth of Hitchens other writings, and watched his widespread debates, one would easily be able to discern a clear lack of intention to provide evidence rather than an inability to do so. What then, do you assert? Also, given that atheists simply do not believe in deities, I find your use of the phrase "straight and narrow" ironic.
Spoken like a true Xian. Whuts the matter seamoron? Sumone make to much sence for your neanderthal mind to handle? Guess your gonna have to just remain a dumbass. Just keep believing in 5 million yearold neanderthat ideas and teachings. You see, they were a lot smarter than you are. Thats why you believe in them.
Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed your vid. I am not an atheist myself (I get severe Buddhist cramps down the backs of my legs and up in my temples) but you're the kind of atheist I'd like to share a cold beer with. Strength to your arm, sir.
I just think you are too stupid to understand your own words. The question you need to ask yourself is, "is hitchens right or wrong?" If you can dismiss parts of his books, since they don't apparently have evidence behind them, can we dismiss your ideas, since you offer absolutely no proof? ... my fav part of your rant is "those sudo-intellectuals...". If they are sudo, then you are a sub. Hitchens clearly points out the difference between atheists and anti-theists. ugh...i want my 7:13 back....
For anyone with an ounce of intelligence he makes a great point.
Back athiesm with science and science has nothing to do with grabbing at examples of bad things religion has done or whether religious people are 'stupid' etc. Science also needs to demonstrate what is being asserted. Abiogenisis as the beginning of life is a theory which as of yet can not be demonstrated through experimentation. But because it's needed to back a popular view it is taught as fact. That isn't science.
@jrmaximus Hitchens simply advocates that atheism is, in a social & historical sense, better for a free society than theism, never does he say atheism is inherently scientific, as that is not possible for a simple lack of belief. As religion is not 'backed' by science either, at best you can neither indict atheism nor exculpate religion on those grounds, only demonstrate equivalency. And then comes historical & contemporary evidence of the effects of the imperatives of belief or lack thereof.
@jrmaximus And as for abiogenesis, it cannot be dismissed so easily as 'you can't recreate it so nyah!' There are many theories that cannot be demonstrated in a simple conclusive reproduction, usually due to the scale involved. (Abiogenesis is one of those as it requires a lifeless planet and a billion years, not easy conditions to replicate.) However, predictions made within the structure of the theory are testable and have held up to scrutiny, Miller-Urey and successive experiments on organics
And as for the --- existance of a creator--- , it cannot be dismissed so easily as 'you can't recreate it so nyah!' There are many theories that cannot be demonstrated in a simple conclusive reproduction, usually due to the scale involved. ( ---the existance of a creator--- is one of those as it requires a lifeless planet and ---who knows how many--- years, not easy conditions to replicate.)
Mostly your own words and just as correct by your own logic.
@jrmaximus Now what happened to the important part? What predictions made by the 'existence of a creator' can be tested? Seems that the equivalency breaks down huh?
@jrmaximus Until you can disprove that abiogenesis is a credible framework for materialistically understanding the origin of life, your assertion that abiogenesis is not scientific is itself not scientific. You must discredit all of the experimentation done in organic chemistry that currently supports the abiogenesis model.
In otherwords the results are tainted by what you want the result to be. No matter how many experiments don't turn up the result you want you still stand on the assertion you are correct based on your 'faith' in what you believe to be true.
@jrmaximus When you can point to the 'many experiments [that] don't turn up the result you want' then it's faith. Until that time, the many experiments that do support the emerging framework of abiogenesis are anything but faith. In fact, the Miller-Urey experiment was more successful than Miller and Urey could originally detect, the technological increase of the resolution in the equipment has demonstrated that even more organic molecules were produced than originally could be measured.
Simply calling Hitchens and Harris "pseudo intellectuals" doesn't make it so. Fortunately, the world doesn't work that way. As it turns out, you actually need to demonstrate how/ provide some substantiation for that claim.
Of course in this case, the substantiation would need to be a force greater than the reputable periodicals, journals, critics, and news agencies that have named them among today's more prominent intellectuals. Looking at your status, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
I can't decide whether it's more sad or funny that Jim Bob with a bachelor's degree just called Stanford educated Sam Harris (who now holds a PhD) and universally renowned polemicist and best selling author Christopher Hitchens "pseudo-intellectuals." An ironic position considering probably the most articulate and prominent Christian theologian, Pastor Douglas Wilson said of Hitchens "he's a public intellectual, which is to say he is the only kind that matters." in their debate movie Collision.
and even if he had, would you not accept that it is acceptable to kill people for thier beliefs if they are putting them into practice? The United States killed people in both World Wars for that exact reason. I accept that it is necessary to restrain people who would do me harm for their beliefs, and if restraint is ineffective or inpracticle then I must take more drastic measures.
I appreciate that you do not want others to speak for you, but none of the speakers you have called out have ever claimed to speak for all atheists. They have created, or tried to create, groups that would bring atheists together but have never claimed to speak for us. I also must address your statements concerning Sam Harris around 5:10. Having listened to many of Sam Harris' debates I have never heard him suggest anything of the sort. [cont]
We atheists all have no belief in deities, and that is the only thing that makes us atheists.
Everything beyond that nonbelief simply makes us individuals. Being an atheist doesn't mean you have to be an anti-theist or anything else. That's up to us to decide for ourselves.
Hey boss. Love to hear the views. But could you please give me a few examples out of the book to what you object? I read it it when it first came out but off the cuff I do not remember many things I took objection too on a factual basis. Since we respect debate and questioning (unlike religion where it would be heresy) I look forward to some examples. Live long and prosper!
When you talk about supportive evidence, are you saying that Hitchens fails to provide the evidence with in his book, or are you saying there is absolutely no supportive evidence?
51 statements without evidence? Have you tried to disprove them, or look for evidence? Christopher Hitchens could be telling the truth, and your lack of intelligence does not give you the right to say they have no evidence in their favour. You can however say there are 51 statements that you're too stupid to know about.
Atheism is passive neutral benigh thing(you said it), and you are looking at it your way sir, and attempting to dictate the rules on to others that you disagree with. you are no different than the religious people wo do the same thing. you contradict yourself on neutrality, you want to further your point of view just like other believers, and are flawed by strong belief in what you believe is true and others in the same boatsto be idiots..just like religios bigots.peace
There is a difference between Atheism and Anti-theism..we know that ... its the believers who dont want to worry with the formality and categorise all into those mosters that oppose OUR FAITH! your arguements are a waste on them , they do nt want to know it, they are ignorance is bliss lovers..or why would they believe in the first place? i accept your disagreement with other atheists or anti-theists, but beyond them no ones listening.peace
In the spirit of peer review on hypocrisy could I just point out your introduction is as "atheist spokesman" and then at 3.16 you condemn the 'pseudo-intellectuals' for speaking on behalf of others.
Im sorry I dont have the faith in me to become an atheist...How much money do Dawkins and Hitchens have made from atheism?. How many books have you bought?
@ImagesByDavid Are you advocating that atheist should not read the secular, literary non-fiction? Those two individuals are lifelong intellectuals; they offer much more insight into the social dynamics of our species than mere reiterations of my disbelief in the celestial dictator. What are you getting at?
It is only your opinion that these individuals offer more insight into human nature than the writings found in Scripture. Whether one believes in the Bible or not. The Bible does speak of Man's inherent fallen nature and his capacity for evil. History has proven this time and time again. Not once do human beings learn from their mistakes. Therefore repeating history over and over again. The 20th Century has been the most secular in history & yet its most bloodiest.
...you look into why atheists have become more vocal I think you'd have to reevaluate your neutrality statement. Remember most atheists aren't fighting for an end to religion. I think it's fair to say the vast majority of us just want it out of politics.
...are religious and we help each-other out I many aspects of our lives despite our differences. That don't change the fact that as an atheist it's almost my duty to NOT be neutral. If religion was "neutral" and didn't have influence on American politics then sure, atheists wouldn't need to be outspoken. This is CLEARLY not the case. How can one expect us to stand by without so much as a grumble of discontent? It's not fair and by it's very nature against everything the USA was founded on. If y
I've watched many of your clips on here and generally have been interested in what you've had to say, even though I'm an atheist. I do have an issue with you stating that atheism is "neutral" by nature. I don't agree. Many atheists have been marginalized by the religious majority even though this religious majority has perpetrated the vast majority of human rights violations since it's inception. Do I think all religious people are fundamental nuts? Of course not. Many of my very good friends a
First (at 3:13), you say, "...who are deigning to speak for other atheists, and I don't like that. You don't speak for me..." But then you go on to say (at 4:19), "Atheism is very passive, neutral, benign thing..." Okay, so first you rail against atheists not thinking for themselves, and then you tell them just what they ought to think about atheism. You're either a poe or a troll - either way, it's not effective.
@PR13STG0RD0 Couldn't watch this video, 3 minutes through, I'm done.
going through any book with a sharpie is simply ignorant. and I am being ignorant by not watching the rest of the video, but the difference is, I admit it.
I can't say that I agree with everything Mr. Hitchens says, but due to events that are happening in my own community, I can honestly say that to be the quiet neutral "atheist" in this day an age should be a relic of the past. When even the moderate Christians begin to call for a church based national programs (health care, yes the Tea-Partiers are on the go here), enuff is enuff. Atheist watchdogs? Is this the self-professed first clergyman of atheism? Almost sounds like it hehe,
You do have good points and I agree that Hitchens can be a hypocrite (I can too and I love it!). There are some points that you could argue that there is evidence (though he doesn't cite any) and there are other situations where it might be his opinion, but on the whole you have a good point.
I would suggest that although his points are opinion or lack in evidence, it's still worth reading.
Also, why did you deface a book that you borrowed? Haha!
I have to say I agree with the point that Atheists are neutral. It is a lack of belief. There is no sunday meeting of Atheists to tear down religion. Well none that i know of. I do not believe in the tooth fairy but there is no name for that. I feel the same about religion. I almost resent the atheist tag for its insinuation. GODLESS HEATHEN that i am. I am not an atheist. I just do not believe in your god. God made me that way so whatcha gonna do.......?
Was contemplating seriously answering your little whine-fest. But I'm afraid that would fall on deaf ears. I just hope you live at night and don't have a family that could get infected with your ignorance.
There are two major problems with this video... one is that many of those statements were indeed backed up with evidence. This oversight is tantamount to quote mining. Secondly there is the huge problem that even without any of there statements, the validity of the theistic claim is not in any way validated! Not to mention the fact that the remaining statements are all open...
"peer review"? do you seriously consider yourself a peer to Christopher Hitchens?
you call these people "pseudo-intellectuals"? Hitchens, Dawkins or Harris have never claimed to speak for a collective atheism, mainly as there is no collective atheism. Ironically, you do. Are you serious? You slam them for claiming to speak for all atheists, which they don't, and then talk about keeping "atheists" on the straight and narrow? i assume this is ironic...
Ironic how this inbred retard actually sees himself as a *parody* of stupid rednecks. It's sort of like watching a flagrantly gay man pretending to be in the closet. At least this guy - or a more literate friend/relative/parole officer acting as ghostwriter - managed to use big-city words like "expunge" correctly in a sentence.
As to the quotes: I randomly picked "page 46" from your list. Guess what, Bubba? The whole 4TH CHAPTER supports this claim! You're not clever, so stop trying to be.
I must say that if you are going to dismiss Christopher Hitchens point, with your example of cancer, then you're not completely understanding how cancer came about. Cancer is an explainable disease and there is proof on how it came about.
"That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." --Hitchen. That is like saying That which came into existence without evidence of how it exactly came into existence can be dismissed as nothing else but delusion: cancer. LOL Hitchen your arguments against your Creator are laughable.
Atheists’ arguments against God are laughable and moronic: If I can give Christian a better life (than the kind of life Jesus—their king—gives them) or at least show them[convince them with facts my way is better than Jesus’] the best way to live life, then I have a right to open my mouth and speak up. But if I cannot do either, then the best thing for me to do is to shut my mouth and let Christians live their lives in Jesus’ Love, Way, and truth!!!
Seabass....your thinking is not clear - you lack knowledge regarding the superstitious envirornment that existed during the Roman Empire. You need to read-up a little on the history of the ressurection story. It is an old theme that runs throughout the middle-east for centuries prior to Jesus. I don't beleive you're an athiest - you're a christian who can't break the habit. No offense - I like your videos and Wyoming looks beautiful. My best from Switzerland - an ATHIEST county, not agnostic.
Comment removed
greeneyesmax 3 weeks ago
FAKE !!! AMERICANS DON' READ BOOKS !
sooperfukker 1 month ago
Typical moron trying to be smart. Our world is full of them.
mailmanjoe2000 3 months ago
im impressed that this man has this book (it Involves reading!). Knows who Mr. Hitchens is AND also knows who Sam Harris is.
AMAZING. ONLY BY THE GRAZE OF gODS!
parisruiz1 3 months ago
HAHA!! Did this dumb redneck refer to himself as Hitchens' peer? HAHA...sorry Jasper, Hitchens isn't a G.E.D. candidate running a backhoe.....
lumpheadthump 4 months ago
The first dumb Atheist I've seen! I knew they existed, I just didn't know where! =o
pokeshmon 6 months ago
you sir are a dumb fuck... a dumb ass jesus freak who thinking lies are ture and thanks its right to lie to kids and kil gay.. fuck you
lpslostagain 6 months ago
he offers evidence for many of the assertions listed, just not in the isolated sentences you quoted.
elkbomb 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is this a troll video?
dhadfield91 7 months ago
WARNING: This video contains yet another Jesus freak masquerading as an atheist.
theDuctapeUnion 7 months ago 10
"I don't mean to be defecting or anythang" LOL I think somehow we'll survive without you. And PLEASE don't refer to anyone else as a pseudo-intellectual, the irony is painful.
SlangForEyesores 7 months ago
Then surely you can dismiss these examples you believe to be without evidence...but what about the rest of the book?
JeffBergification 8 months ago
What I find comical is that this man will sarcastically use Hitchens' own method in review of his book as a way to mock him, yet will undoubtedly NOT use that same method in review of the Bible. This type of irony is the same that Christians commonly use when bashing other religions ($cientology and its belief in aliens, for example) whilst simultaneously believing in talking snakes, Jewish zombies, and an invisible, celestial sky daddy.
Most ignorance is willful.
stxtigers08 8 months ago
Jesus H Christ. Good thing for Christians you're all not as stupid as this guy.
DarkHorse0863 8 months ago
So...you redacted the opinions of the author and left the historical truths...don't think you quite understand.
SSGWhit 8 months ago
As a mention, your note for Page 102 does not deserve to be struck out. That is, in fact, a true statement. The evidence is pretty clear, pick up and read a Bible. Specifically Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. I believe the foundation is set in Leviticus, and Deuteronomy gives specifics. To the point of even dictating what individuals you can traffic and why.
LrdAsmodeous 8 months ago
Alright, haven't read Hitchens' book, but a few corrections:
-Hitchens constantly calls himself "not an atheist, but an anti-theist". You fail.
-Look up atheism on Wikipedia, and its distinctions between "strong" and "weak".
-Where does Hitchens say he speaks for all atheists? All he ever said was that he speaks for those who share his annoyance at intrusive / dangerous religion, and the general nonsense.
And there I hoped for an actual rebuttal of his "challenge". Oh well.
twooffour 8 months ago
I'll beet chur asssssssssssss! Ol' Cristafur hichens
jastheace06 9 months ago
Capn0 if you don’t care what people have to say quote at 6:17 then why jump down people’s throats and correct their spelling, look up dictionary definitions, degrade their comments and call them dumb-dumb? You even state “LMFAO I live for days like this” to user V45Rider which indicates you actually like people to leave unflattering comments so you can react to them. If you didn’t care you would hardly retaliate in an ad hominem attack as a form of defense.
seonidh 9 months ago 3
You are the epiphany of the Canadian stereotype about America, well done.
MasonicEyes 9 months ago 2
@MasonicEyes
I believe the word you were looking for is "epitome", not "epiphany."
An epiphany is when someone has a sudden, eye-opening flash of insight.... like suddenly realizing you don't know what the word "epiphany" means.
Capn0bvious 9 months ago 7
@Capn0bvious LMAO
sixtiksix 9 months ago
@Capn0bvious No I meant epiphany, upon realizing such people exist in America.
MasonicEyes 9 months ago
@MasonicEyes
LOL. "I meant to do that."
Nice try Pee Wee Herman.
Capn0bvious 9 months ago
@Capn0bvious perhaps that guy's comment is the "epiphany" of the united states stereotype of canadian folk (masoniceyes) hahaha
MadMAn12gauge 9 months ago
@Capn0bvious HAHAHA This was one of the best comments I've seen this month!
TomPark1986 8 months ago
uhhhhhh "peer review?" You sir, are no "peer" of Mr. Hitchens......
ATTICUSFINCH51 9 months ago
So when will you be make any arguments defending your claims?
obijan42 9 months ago
@DawkinsForWeAreMany I AM happy... happy that I'm not a brainwashed, rebarbative theist moron like you!
You sound like a typical biblehugger: never went passed high school, and can barely construe a thought worth having.
"Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool." - Mark Twain
Check out your fellow obese jeebus humpers, hard at work lying to little kids:
watch?v=2STDH14aJVk
You sick bastards can't leave the kids alone.It just shows how WEAK your own beliefs are!
V45Rider 10 months ago
3:08 "Self-proclaimed, often times, ehh atheists" So...sometimes you just call someone an atheist and then you dislike them just for that?
TamaThePeck 10 months ago
@DawkinsForWeAreMany You're saying it's better to lie to yourself and say there's a god? LMAO
At least atheists are realistic, and don't kow tow to fairy tales! And BTW, all the church going maggots I've ever met are arrogant, unfriendly, stuck-up, self-centered garbage.Not surprising, when someone thinks they have a GOD on their side ☺
And why say "Less evolved"? You think god just snapped his fingers, no evolution needed.
Talk about being mixed up! Go back to proselytising little kids...
V45Rider 10 months ago
I think he's ACTUALLY sitting on an armchair.
dilbread 10 months ago
Is that really the book "God is not Great" It looks like you just printed out a cover and stuck it over a random book. I've never see one with a white bar on the top
slye1991 10 months ago
Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris are "pseudo-intellectuals"??? Even the most fundemental **honest** religionist wouldn't make such an arrogant and dishonest statement!
I bet the real reason all those blacked out words were in your book was because you crossed out the ones you couldn't pronounce or define.
Dhumm81 10 months ago
Keep fighting for air buddy. Information can be shared at the speed of light thanks to the internet. We are now able to discern truth, and it's killing religion. Thank your god that you will probably be long gone by the time it is put to rest, but believe me as our inteligence increases your god decreases.
josephrl82 10 months ago
There's a reason this jackass has dentures... He's probably had his face kicked in many times for being a high school drop-out, trailerpark pederast!
I mean, seriously buddy, how far have you gotten in life? Head janitor at the local McFatty's?
You even go so far as to make up words like "exbrigate" 5:48.
I DARE you to show your high school diploma on YT! LMAO
6:13 "Self-acclaimed" atheist, indeed.No one else would do it for you! You suck hillbilly cock...
Long live The Hitch☺
V45Rider 10 months ago 14
@V45Rider
LMFAO.... I live for days like this....
"You even go so far as to make up words like "exbrigate" 5:48."
The word is "expurgate", moron.... not "exbrigate."
Next time you pull your head out of your ass to come up for air... you might want to look into a thing called a "dictionary."
ex·pur·gate/ˈ ekspərˌgāt/
Verb: To remove matter thought to be incorrect, objectionable or unsuitable; as from a book or account.
Got that, dumb-dumb?
I dare you to show your grade school diploma.
Capn0bvious 10 months ago
@Capn0bvious It's hard to tell WHAT you're saying, with your dentures wobbling around in that anus you call a mouth! Had your face bashed in often enough, capt' tuffstuff?
And I see you have no problem being called a pederast... not surprising.Most trailerpark rednecks take it for granted! LMAO
How's the mop and bucket at McTubby's treating you? ☺
V45Rider 10 months ago
@Capn0bvious You are not the peer of Christopher Hitchens, not remotely close to being one. Your motives for posting this clip on youtube are as vacuous as they are transparent. Christopher Hitchens is in no way a "pseudo intellectual" as you assert he is. Christopher Hitchens is in fact a great intellectual as well as being a great man. You sir, are a moron attempting to execute what is a completely doomed attempt at self flattery. You have failed.
vaiboy55 9 months ago 3
@V45Rider wow....guess you got it handed it to ya....
sixtiksix 9 months ago
@sixtiksix Umm, if you can somehow decypher this cavemans' mumblings, you probably speak the same "trailerparkese", my hillybilly friend ☺
It sounds EXACTLY like he's saying "exbrigate".Deal.
And the pederast charge stands.It's just a way of life in trailers! LMAO
V45Rider 9 months ago
@V45Rider Very impressive, who can stand up to you're superior logic and maturity.
sixtiksix 9 months ago
@V45Rider Think about your denture comment and then think about Hitchens...then think about the irony...then maybe think a little more....
good luck....
sixtiksix 9 months ago
Redacting the book not highlighting ...
CATSASS1117 10 months ago
Hitchens proudly proclaims he is anti-theist. So do I. You sir, are no peer of Hitchens.
csnowutube 10 months ago 2
@csnowutube Yes I am.... I peed on him just last week.
Capn0bvious 10 months ago
@Capn0bvious Who do you write for professionally again? And what talk or radio shows have you been a guest on? What books have you written again? Which university (not Oxford) did you go to again? Wait a minute, I dont know your name! Help me out here.
ColdCypher 9 months ago
Most of these are opinions of Christopher's (as is pretty much the whole book, kinda the point) when taken in context. i wasn't aware his opinions were to be taken as 'atheist gospel' or transformed into a dogma? Or that opinions were to be all proven empirically?As many opinions dealing with say morality cannot be proven/disproven. you can only show the merits of one over another logically. Which I believe this book is an attempt at? Where's your point? Oh, you never had one?
Christopholaes 11 months ago
Excellent.
phlewis86 11 months ago
Its amazing to me that this guy is not a youth minister in a southern baptist church. Something is fishy here
herdondoozer 11 months ago
@Capn0bvious You mentioned that certain people speak on behalf of atheism. First, I'd like to say that Hitchens is an anti-theist as well as an atheist. Second, and this is simply my opinion, these guys seem to simply be the most vocal proponents of atheism. I'm not getting a feeling of "they are establishing an atheist dogma" particularly.
That aside, we must always question and struggle and demand proof. Keep doing what you're doing! It'd be a shame for atheism to become dogmatic.
DirectInjected 11 months ago
what a prat.
sixfifty3 11 months ago
Im simon and your NOT going to hollywood.
5H4V3D89 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I lack believe in god. But I dont lack opinions about religions.
Nakkikassi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I lack believe in god. But I dont lack opinions about religions.
Nakkikassi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I lack believe in god. But I dont lack opinions about religions.
Nakkikassi 1 year ago
What a hypocrite, you don't speak for atheists.. Your not a genius, sorry to break it to you, nice try....
Your not going to make a name for yourself doing this...
Martial024 1 year ago 2
Got bored after two minutes,what a joker
8496ricko 1 year ago 2
Atheist spokesperson? I have seen your videos and really doubt that you are an atheist. You speak like a Christian trying to persuade atheist whilst pretending to be an atheist. Saying that Hitchens is trying to make us think a certain way, completely goes against freethinking and obviously misses the point of the book.
Killjeser 1 year ago 2
captain obvious ... more like captain oblivious.
xn117 1 year ago
PEER review?
ThisClownis2in1 1 year ago
CapnObvious: I think you need to start from the beginning of the book again and read a little slower this time. You say these passages don't have any evidence; well then you somehow managed to miss his arguements. Try again.
Then you say he is bashing religion. Mr. Hitchens is explaining why religion is bad... what did you expect? What would you suggest he write:"I am an atheist. The end."
Rediculous statements dog watcher.
ddclarke10 1 year ago
I think he is talking about what is called Misotheism - a hatred for God. Some Atheism is Misotheism a hatred of God. He makes the point with Chris Htichens.
Ear4Beauty 1 year ago
I think he is talking about what is called Misotheism - a hatred for God. Some Atheistm is Misotheism a hatred of God. This was a rather interesting video. I am a Christian.
Ear4Beauty 1 year ago
For trolling i rate this video 5/10. It is like Boxxy only he is actually serious underneath the troll, attempting to undermine atheistic materials. As far as 'peer review', i think the OP is far from a peer of the author he'd like to discredit. I also think OP confuses anecdotal evidence with assertion. Overall i rate OP's IQ at 125 and like what he is doing, even though i am obviously patronising him. I also think OP probably 'transcribes' straight to film and thinks it is divinely inspired.
G4LVATRON 1 year ago
I hear what your saying and agree...just cause 1 finds the truth or what 1 would concider the truth,does not give them the right to bash on others,besides expressing or defending why one believes the way they do.It can be self distructing to think we have all the answers.But also it is hard not to push back against others who claim their right and your wrong,can't be out to attack others on what they believe,the same goes for everyone,believe what you want intill you have to defend your P O veiw
chucka59 1 year ago
Are those dentures Seabass dumbass? sorry i meant dumass?
PaytonFu 1 year ago
Lets take this in its full context. (starting on page 149) The author was drawing the parallel between baseless claims, past and current, between disasters the beliefs of the religious that attributed the cause of said disasters (i.e. Jerry Falwell's claim that America's acceptance of homosexuality was the cause of 9/11) hence the phrase used in the book "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." Great job-loser! Lear to read good loser
douglasmstewart 1 year ago 3
@douglasmstewart
"Lear to read good loser"? Lol... Someone needs to "lear" to write more betterer.
Capn0bvious 1 year ago
@Capn0bvious Wow. your ignorance is incredible. You just completely ignored his point to make some childish joke about him not writing every single word exactly right. Basic christian argument: ignore every point anyone made and than pick on then for a small irrelevant mistake.
MrPizzapoika 10 months ago
@MrPizzapoika
When someone finishes up their "points" by calling me a loser (twice), I really don't feel obliged to answer anything they had to say in the first place. Would you?
Capn0bvious 10 months ago
@Capn0bvious Yes.
MrPizzapoika 9 months ago
I turned the video off as soon as he said the term "pseudointellectual."
ProkofievRules 1 year ago
Forest Gump lol
mikeyo1234 1 year ago
I lack belive in god. But I dont lack opinions about religions.
Nakkikassi 1 year ago 27
@Nakkikassi You also clearly lack grammar.
1danyol1 1 year ago
@1danyol1 I'm not an native english speaker, true. But I'm willing to debate with you in finnish or in swedish, lets see how your grammar works for these languages. Oh and in future I'll try to learn to write better english.
Nakkikassi 1 year ago
Can you even read? Can you comprehend? Atheists don't make claims, theists do. Atheists refute them. Do some basic research before making a fool of yourself. Using fancy words like 'syntax' don't make you smart, they just show you read Tony Robbins. You sir, are the pseudo-intellectual....stop projecting. It's unbecoming.
sparky7718 1 year ago
@benjmann2 Anybody that calls Hitchens and Dawkins 'pseudo-intellectuals' is either:
brainwashed
stupid
not listening
not comprehending
believes in God
Any combo of the above... poor sod.
sparky7718 1 year ago 2
Ya, your not really believable, clearly this is supposed to be a parody, ok we get it, your trying to go with logic, to discount Hitchenings arguments, yet you do not even state anything he says which you think are hypocritically, just claim they are, so if you want to not seem like a stupid ignorant hick.. Umm clearly state were he does this in his book, and explain it. Sheesh...
ASexyChef 1 year ago
I was gong to vote thumbs down after I laughed at this, but the people have already spoken. I only add one insult to inury per day. Quota met.
cowlark2000 1 year ago
Off the top of my head, (46) - Iran. (176) - MLK's doctoral thesis was on the impossibility of the Resurrection. (125) - The Catholic church has been defining any reporter who exposes them as "biased." (254) - Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake. (250) - Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Sung-Il, etc. (5) - You've got to be kidding me if you think this isn't true, i.e., prison is filled with a disproportionate amount of Christians. (86) - Find me a dispute that hasn't. (102) - Obvious.
cowlark2000 1 year ago
Chris Hitchens does not call himself an atheist. He is a self-proclaimed anti-theist. He is against theism as a dangerous and amoral proposition.
Sam Harris holds dogmatic faith of any stripe with the same contempt. Adherence to religious dogma is dangerous to mankind (inquisition, Islamic terrorism, mad gunmen...) You may stand neutral, but don't ask me to kowtow to such a tyranny of faith.
drfoxcourt 1 year ago
Let me break it down for you Dumbass... God = Bigfoot. Is that simple enough for you? There is no logical reason to believe in scary Native American tales of an 8 foot tall 700lb monster. It's great for keeping the kids in line, and some dense adults like yourself. But nothing more. There is no Bigfoot and there is no God... got it?
sparky7718 1 year ago
He calls Hitchens and Dawkins pseudo-intellectuals? Not to rip on the southern draw, but WFT? I've read "God is Not Great," "The God Delusion," and "The Greatest Show on Earth," and I found the syntax of both Hitchens and Dawkins to be both eloquent and precise. To be an atheist does not imply a hatred for religion. That being said, I can't see how some free-thinkers don't get irritated at or frustrated with the nonsensical beliefs and compartmentalization of the average religious person.
hull612 1 year ago
Comment removed
hull612 1 year ago
There is no way this guy is an athiest, he is much to dumb....
weasterlin 1 year ago 2
Christopher Hitchens' book is Christopher Hitchens' 'take'.. he never ASSERTS his 'opinions' as being fact... his thoughts on 'dismissing' things that are asserted with lack of evidence is pertaining to those things that people want to assert as being 'truth' you know.. factual... Christopher Hitchens didn't 'drama queen' his title, but you sure had a hay day with this video....
melonade1972 1 year ago
Yeah, Thanks for the tip, dude. Bub bye.
rickylarch 1 year ago
It's Goofy personified.
TheGoalSetter 1 year ago
Check out your ratings. You really are a bumass!!
artwdog 1 year ago
This man uses twice as many words to say half as much.
themediocrenontheist 1 year ago
Also, I think Hitch expects (at least some of) his readers to do some investigating on their own. Reading one book doesn't cut it, I'm sure your little Alabama town has a whole library now...git 'er done.
Be well, Hitch. Our thoughts are with you. Cheers.
Heathen2112 1 year ago
There are enough atheists out there who don't say a word to anyone about their atheism. Unless you're wearing blinders, we're in a battle with religion and we don't need people like you attacking our best writers/speakers. (BTW is that a crucifix you're wearing under your shirt?)
Heathen2112 1 year ago
Capnobvious, so far i listened to you jabber for 5 minutes and you say absolutely nothing.
where are you cominatcha from NC SC TN GA. some good old boy, bible belt state.
Yee Hah. you freakin hillbilly.
lhurien 1 year ago
Great idea, Seabass. Now take that Sharpie to the bible (just as Thomas Jefferson did!) and you'll wind up with a pretty slim pamphlet to base a religion on.
sketto 1 year ago 3
You're telling Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins not to speak for you. But you find no problem saying "If you're going to call yourself atheist then you better stick within the parameters... atheism is a very passive, neutral, benign thing." You can say what you want, don't get pissed when they do the same thing. These people are making their case against religion. What's not to like about a well articulated personal perspective?
kingrichad 1 year ago 2
u cant be an antitheist without also being an atheist.. so this video is retarded
MlSHKlN 1 year ago
@MlSHKlN If you believe the Bible is true, but still find it detestable, you could be considered an antitheist. The video is retarded for much better reasons.
sybo59 1 year ago
I like how this joker describes Hitchens and Sam Harris as Pseudo-Intellectuals at 3:05.
rsullie 1 year ago
Dumb ass??is it?? dumas/dumbass?? whatever..atheist or not I don't give a fuck !!!....just shut the fuck up DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME or claim to speak for me !!! I can speak for myself!!!! I do not require any cocksucking nitwit speaking or claiming to speak for me . so shut the fuck up !!!!
recordingbean 1 year ago
I think you've absolutely overlooked the instances that would make provisions of evidence a requirement, none of which are contained in this book. Having read the wealth of Hitchens other writings, and watched his widespread debates, one would easily be able to discern a clear lack of intention to provide evidence rather than an inability to do so. What then, do you assert? Also, given that atheists simply do not believe in deities, I find your use of the phrase "straight and narrow" ironic.
tititata 1 year ago
Hitchens is antitheist not atheist.
hughring 1 year ago
Spoken like a true Xian. Whuts the matter seamoron? Sumone make to much sence for your neanderthal mind to handle? Guess your gonna have to just remain a dumbass. Just keep believing in 5 million yearold neanderthat ideas and teachings. You see, they were a lot smarter than you are. Thats why you believe in them.
sa10ic 1 year ago
Comment removed
SausageDoc 1 year ago
Hey Capn,
Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed your vid. I am not an atheist myself (I get severe Buddhist cramps down the backs of my legs and up in my temples) but you're the kind of atheist I'd like to share a cold beer with. Strength to your arm, sir.
SausageDoc 1 year ago
Ahhh....rully do lark Hitchens book here.........Ah evun managed ta git thro thuh first sentence without needin to look fer a dickshuniry........
philster61 1 year ago
oooooo... "extricate"... fancy words...
111steven 1 year ago
I just think you are too stupid to understand your own words. The question you need to ask yourself is, "is hitchens right or wrong?" If you can dismiss parts of his books, since they don't apparently have evidence behind them, can we dismiss your ideas, since you offer absolutely no proof? ... my fav part of your rant is "those sudo-intellectuals...". If they are sudo, then you are a sub. Hitchens clearly points out the difference between atheists and anti-theists. ugh...i want my 7:13 back....
111steven 1 year ago
For anyone with an ounce of intelligence he makes a great point.
Back athiesm with science and science has nothing to do with grabbing at examples of bad things religion has done or whether religious people are 'stupid' etc. Science also needs to demonstrate what is being asserted. Abiogenisis as the beginning of life is a theory which as of yet can not be demonstrated through experimentation. But because it's needed to back a popular view it is taught as fact. That isn't science.
jrmaximus 1 year ago
@jrmaximus Hitchens simply advocates that atheism is, in a social & historical sense, better for a free society than theism, never does he say atheism is inherently scientific, as that is not possible for a simple lack of belief. As religion is not 'backed' by science either, at best you can neither indict atheism nor exculpate religion on those grounds, only demonstrate equivalency. And then comes historical & contemporary evidence of the effects of the imperatives of belief or lack thereof.
TheElectricTurtle 1 year ago
@jrmaximus And as for abiogenesis, it cannot be dismissed so easily as 'you can't recreate it so nyah!' There are many theories that cannot be demonstrated in a simple conclusive reproduction, usually due to the scale involved. (Abiogenesis is one of those as it requires a lifeless planet and a billion years, not easy conditions to replicate.) However, predictions made within the structure of the theory are testable and have held up to scrutiny, Miller-Urey and successive experiments on organics
TheElectricTurtle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheElectricTurtle
And as for the --- existance of a creator--- , it cannot be dismissed so easily as 'you can't recreate it so nyah!' There are many theories that cannot be demonstrated in a simple conclusive reproduction, usually due to the scale involved. ( ---the existance of a creator--- is one of those as it requires a lifeless planet and ---who knows how many--- years, not easy conditions to replicate.)
Mostly your own words and just as correct by your own logic.
jrmaximus 1 year ago
@jrmaximus Now what happened to the important part? What predictions made by the 'existence of a creator' can be tested? Seems that the equivalency breaks down huh?
TheElectricTurtle 1 year ago
@jrmaximus Until you can disprove that abiogenesis is a credible framework for materialistically understanding the origin of life, your assertion that abiogenesis is not scientific is itself not scientific. You must discredit all of the experimentation done in organic chemistry that currently supports the abiogenesis model.
TheElectricTurtle 1 year ago
@TheElectricTurtle
In otherwords the results are tainted by what you want the result to be. No matter how many experiments don't turn up the result you want you still stand on the assertion you are correct based on your 'faith' in what you believe to be true.
jrmaximus 1 year ago
@jrmaximus When you can point to the 'many experiments [that] don't turn up the result you want' then it's faith. Until that time, the many experiments that do support the emerging framework of abiogenesis are anything but faith. In fact, the Miller-Urey experiment was more successful than Miller and Urey could originally detect, the technological increase of the resolution in the equipment has demonstrated that even more organic molecules were produced than originally could be measured.
TheElectricTurtle 1 year ago
what a redneck shitwad
sadieshmoo 1 year ago
Simply calling Hitchens and Harris "pseudo intellectuals" doesn't make it so. Fortunately, the world doesn't work that way. As it turns out, you actually need to demonstrate how/ provide some substantiation for that claim.
Of course in this case, the substantiation would need to be a force greater than the reputable periodicals, journals, critics, and news agencies that have named them among today's more prominent intellectuals. Looking at your status, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
BrianASoto 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I can't decide whether it's more sad or funny that Jim Bob with a bachelor's degree just called Stanford educated Sam Harris (who now holds a PhD) and universally renowned polemicist and best selling author Christopher Hitchens "pseudo-intellectuals." An ironic position considering probably the most articulate and prominent Christian theologian, Pastor Douglas Wilson said of Hitchens "he's a public intellectual, which is to say he is the only kind that matters." in their debate movie Collision.
DarwinsGauntlet 1 year ago
Comment removed
DarwinsGauntlet 1 year ago
and even if he had, would you not accept that it is acceptable to kill people for thier beliefs if they are putting them into practice? The United States killed people in both World Wars for that exact reason. I accept that it is necessary to restrain people who would do me harm for their beliefs, and if restraint is ineffective or inpracticle then I must take more drastic measures.
autaturk 1 year ago
I appreciate that you do not want others to speak for you, but none of the speakers you have called out have ever claimed to speak for all atheists. They have created, or tried to create, groups that would bring atheists together but have never claimed to speak for us. I also must address your statements concerning Sam Harris around 5:10. Having listened to many of Sam Harris' debates I have never heard him suggest anything of the sort. [cont]
autaturk 1 year ago
The Hitch will probably respect Seabass more than uncritical Hitchosycophants who uncritically lap up his every word like manna from heaven.
chunkyjake6644 1 year ago
wow. lots of people don't like your video, man.
Atheissst 1 year ago
We atheists all have no belief in deities, and that is the only thing that makes us atheists.
Everything beyond that nonbelief simply makes us individuals. Being an atheist doesn't mean you have to be an anti-theist or anything else. That's up to us to decide for ourselves.
LikeALeadZeppelin 1 year ago
Hey boss. Love to hear the views. But could you please give me a few examples out of the book to what you object? I read it it when it first came out but off the cuff I do not remember many things I took objection too on a factual basis. Since we respect debate and questioning (unlike religion where it would be heresy) I look forward to some examples. Live long and prosper!
2EZEE 1 year ago
When you talk about supportive evidence, are you saying that Hitchens fails to provide the evidence with in his book, or are you saying there is absolutely no supportive evidence?
bryansteeksma 1 year ago
Comment removed
SgtDICTION 1 year ago
what's so bad about being an anti-theist? that being said, i truly enjoyed this vid.
anuntakenname 1 year ago
A grade Idiot ......... i just blew 7 minutes of my life which i will never get back
bhallavivifyupoad 1 year ago
51 statements without evidence? Have you tried to disprove them, or look for evidence? Christopher Hitchens could be telling the truth, and your lack of intelligence does not give you the right to say they have no evidence in their favour. You can however say there are 51 statements that you're too stupid to know about.
OTSTRETFORD 1 year ago
The problem is people having to define a way of thinking by general terminology.
Slotting people into category and such.
At parts i heartily agreed with you and when it came to your general slander i found it then, hypocritically, lost credibility somewhat.
Tait011 1 year ago
Atheism is passive neutral benigh thing(you said it), and you are looking at it your way sir, and attempting to dictate the rules on to others that you disagree with. you are no different than the religious people wo do the same thing. you contradict yourself on neutrality, you want to further your point of view just like other believers, and are flawed by strong belief in what you believe is true and others in the same boatsto be idiots..just like religios bigots.peace
sushanalone 1 year ago
There is a difference between Atheism and Anti-theism..we know that ... its the believers who dont want to worry with the formality and categorise all into those mosters that oppose OUR FAITH! your arguements are a waste on them , they do nt want to know it, they are ignorance is bliss lovers..or why would they believe in the first place? i accept your disagreement with other atheists or anti-theists, but beyond them no ones listening.peace
sushanalone 1 year ago
@sushanalone Actually, he's a Christian playing a character. It isn't really obvious with some of his less "extreme" personalities, though.
Lifragen 1 year ago
I think Hitchens does the "drama queen" routine intentionally
mythicalhell 1 year ago
In the spirit of peer review on hypocrisy could I just point out your introduction is as "atheist spokesman" and then at 3.16 you condemn the 'pseudo-intellectuals' for speaking on behalf of others.
ukanian 1 year ago
@AtheistNY
Im sorry I dont have the faith in me to become an atheist...How much money do Dawkins and Hitchens have made from atheism?. How many books have you bought?
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
@ImagesByDavid A copy of each title, I guess?
AtheistNY 1 year ago
@AtheistNY
You paid Dawkins and Hitchens money to tell you what you already believe.
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
@ImagesByDavid Are you advocating that atheist should not read the secular, literary non-fiction? Those two individuals are lifelong intellectuals; they offer much more insight into the social dynamics of our species than mere reiterations of my disbelief in the celestial dictator. What are you getting at?
AtheistNY 1 year ago
@AtheistNY
It is only your opinion that these individuals offer more insight into human nature than the writings found in Scripture. Whether one believes in the Bible or not. The Bible does speak of Man's inherent fallen nature and his capacity for evil. History has proven this time and time again. Not once do human beings learn from their mistakes. Therefore repeating history over and over again. The 20th Century has been the most secular in history & yet its most bloodiest.
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hereticalable
Im really sorry I hope you can understand, I just cant find it in me that nothing begats nothing..I just don't have the faith in me to.
How much money do people like Hitchens and Dawkins make from atheism?
ImagesByDavid 1 year ago
This reminds me of Hitchens vs. Mos Def.
watch?v=-Ew9CngVeFA
sincristo 1 year ago
...you look into why atheists have become more vocal I think you'd have to reevaluate your neutrality statement. Remember most atheists aren't fighting for an end to religion. I think it's fair to say the vast majority of us just want it out of politics.
vaileyguy 1 year ago
...are religious and we help each-other out I many aspects of our lives despite our differences. That don't change the fact that as an atheist it's almost my duty to NOT be neutral. If religion was "neutral" and didn't have influence on American politics then sure, atheists wouldn't need to be outspoken. This is CLEARLY not the case. How can one expect us to stand by without so much as a grumble of discontent? It's not fair and by it's very nature against everything the USA was founded on. If y
vaileyguy 1 year ago
I've watched many of your clips on here and generally have been interested in what you've had to say, even though I'm an atheist. I do have an issue with you stating that atheism is "neutral" by nature. I don't agree. Many atheists have been marginalized by the religious majority even though this religious majority has perpetrated the vast majority of human rights violations since it's inception. Do I think all religious people are fundamental nuts? Of course not. Many of my very good friends a
vaileyguy 1 year ago
Dunning–Kruger effect
Mafiaaffe 1 year ago
go back to your dentist bro.
euroman32589 1 year ago
Fool
supertuber97 1 year ago
First (at 3:13), you say, "...who are deigning to speak for other atheists, and I don't like that. You don't speak for me..." But then you go on to say (at 4:19), "Atheism is very passive, neutral, benign thing..." Okay, so first you rail against atheists not thinking for themselves, and then you tell them just what they ought to think about atheism. You're either a poe or a troll - either way, it's not effective.
M0US3P0T4TO 1 year ago
@PR13STG0RD0 Couldn't watch this video, 3 minutes through, I'm done.
going through any book with a sharpie is simply ignorant. and I am being ignorant by not watching the rest of the video, but the difference is, I admit it.
st3even 1 year ago
@st3even Going thru the bible with a sharpie would leave a whole lot more blacked out.
This guy is just clinging to an old dead ideology.
Religion is already dead. Some people just can't move on.
PR13STG0RD0 1 year ago
I can't say that I agree with everything Mr. Hitchens says, but due to events that are happening in my own community, I can honestly say that to be the quiet neutral "atheist" in this day an age should be a relic of the past. When even the moderate Christians begin to call for a church based national programs (health care, yes the Tea-Partiers are on the go here), enuff is enuff. Atheist watchdogs? Is this the self-professed first clergyman of atheism? Almost sounds like it hehe,
L2Sixcer 1 year ago
You do have good points and I agree that Hitchens can be a hypocrite (I can too and I love it!). There are some points that you could argue that there is evidence (though he doesn't cite any) and there are other situations where it might be his opinion, but on the whole you have a good point.
I would suggest that although his points are opinion or lack in evidence, it's still worth reading.
Also, why did you deface a book that you borrowed? Haha!
zenqimaster 1 year ago
I have to say I agree with the point that Atheists are neutral. It is a lack of belief. There is no sunday meeting of Atheists to tear down religion. Well none that i know of. I do not believe in the tooth fairy but there is no name for that. I feel the same about religion. I almost resent the atheist tag for its insinuation. GODLESS HEATHEN that i am. I am not an atheist. I just do not believe in your god. God made me that way so whatcha gonna do.......?
zappafile 1 year ago
Well done. I think that you are critical of atheism, anti-theism, Christianity, Islam, pastafarianism and the whole bunch.
Atheists must be held to the same rational rules of evidence and reason.
I think you go too far in dismissing Mr Harris, Mr Hitchens and Dr Dawkins by over-reaching generalizations, of which you accuse them.
drfoxcourt 1 year ago
Was contemplating seriously answering your little whine-fest. But I'm afraid that would fall on deaf ears. I just hope you live at night and don't have a family that could get infected with your ignorance.
dkudlay 1 year ago 2
Vax Day as tags? Is he the one that has to mention his IQ every second sentence?
No evidence? Last on the list Page 102. Have you *read* the Bible? Man, this makes you look really bad! So sad man....
csadler 1 year ago
OI you redneck, you cant read let alone have any opinion you ass. stick to your inbred tendancies.
filosifi 1 year ago
There are two major problems with this video... one is that many of those statements were indeed backed up with evidence. This oversight is tantamount to quote mining. Secondly there is the huge problem that even without any of there statements, the validity of the theistic claim is not in any way validated! Not to mention the fact that the remaining statements are all open...
seansalvador1 1 year ago
Hitchens actually calls him self Anti-Theist buy the way....
pigment777 1 year ago
HITCHENS IS A HERO !!!!!
pigment777 1 year ago
"peer review"? do you seriously consider yourself a peer to Christopher Hitchens?
you call these people "pseudo-intellectuals"? Hitchens, Dawkins or Harris have never claimed to speak for a collective atheism, mainly as there is no collective atheism. Ironically, you do. Are you serious? You slam them for claiming to speak for all atheists, which they don't, and then talk about keeping "atheists" on the straight and narrow? i assume this is ironic...
aardjazz 1 year ago
Ironic how this inbred retard actually sees himself as a *parody* of stupid rednecks. It's sort of like watching a flagrantly gay man pretending to be in the closet. At least this guy - or a more literate friend/relative/parole officer acting as ghostwriter - managed to use big-city words like "expunge" correctly in a sentence.
As to the quotes: I randomly picked "page 46" from your list. Guess what, Bubba? The whole 4TH CHAPTER supports this claim! You're not clever, so stop trying to be.
vau0807 1 year ago
This guy is fool.
shnimmuc 1 year ago
@Airlighttf
I must say that if you are going to dismiss Christopher Hitchens point, with your example of cancer, then you're not completely understanding how cancer came about. Cancer is an explainable disease and there is proof on how it came about.
APenguinsLunch 1 year ago
"That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." --Hitchen. That is like saying That which came into existence without evidence of how it exactly came into existence can be dismissed as nothing else but delusion: cancer. LOL Hitchen your arguments against your Creator are laughable.
Airlightf 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheists’ arguments against God are laughable and moronic: If I can give Christian a better life (than the kind of life Jesus—their king—gives them) or at least show them[convince them with facts my way is better than Jesus’] the best way to live life, then I have a right to open my mouth and speak up. But if I cannot do either, then the best thing for me to do is to shut my mouth and let Christians live their lives in Jesus’ Love, Way, and truth!!!
Airlightf 1 year ago
Wow, a hillbilly! Typically religious hick *rolls eyes*
Alexdurrant7 1 year ago
Seabass....your thinking is not clear - you lack knowledge regarding the superstitious envirornment that existed during the Roman Empire. You need to read-up a little on the history of the ressurection story. It is an old theme that runs throughout the middle-east for centuries prior to Jesus. I don't beleive you're an athiest - you're a christian who can't break the habit. No offense - I like your videos and Wyoming looks beautiful. My best from Switzerland - an ATHIEST county, not agnostic.
masala505 1 year ago
*cough* REDNECK *cough*
luarionte 1 year ago